LEAD — Family Business Enterprise
All frameworks
Governance architecture

Role–Right–Responsibility Framework™

Clarifies accountability, decision authority and deliverable outcomes for family members, promoters, siblings, shareholders, next-generation members and professional management.

Role–Right–Responsibility Framework™ framework in practice
01Why it exists

End authority claimed through ownership rather than contribution.

Give professional management a real mandate rather than revocable permission.

Publish entry rules for next-generation members before they are needed.

02The model explained

Role

What a person does — the work itself, defined and visible.

Right

What a person may decide, and within what limits.

Responsibility

What a person is answerable for, and to whom.

How it is applied

  1. 01

    Mapping of current role, right and responsibility for every family and senior professional position.

  2. 02

    Identification of overlaps, gaps and rights exercised without matching responsibility.

  3. 03

    Published charter with compensation logic, entry rules and review cadence.

  • —Separating the three ends the most common family dispute: authority claimed through ownership rather than contribution.
  • —Applied to entry rules for next-generation members, compensation logic and professional management mandates.
03Applied to
Next-Generation Entry
Qualification, role fit and earned authority.
Sibling Partnerships
Parallel authority without parallel accountability.
Professional Management
Real mandate versus permission that can be withdrawn.
04Sample assessment

Indicative mapping items completed for each position under review.

  • 01

    State this position's three deliverables for the current year.

    Reads: Role

    Open response
  • 02

    What is the highest-value decision this position can take alone?

    Reads: Right

    Value / category
  • 03

    Who reviews this position's performance, and how often?

    Reads: Responsibility

    Open response
  • 04

    Is any right held here without matching responsibility?

    Reads: Alignment

    Yes / No
05Sample report

Illustrative report — sibling-run distribution business

58

Role clarity

33

Right–responsibility match

41

Management mandate strength

26

Compensation logic

Findings

  • —Two siblings held identical veto rights over the same function with no shared accountability.
  • —The professional CEO's mandate could be overridden verbally by any shareholder.
  • —Family compensation was set by seniority, unconnected to role or market benchmark.

Recommended sequence

  • One accountable owner per function; the second sibling holds consultation rights only.
  • CEO mandate documented with defined override conditions requiring a board resolution.
  • Compensation rebased to role and benchmark, with a transition period agreed by the family.

Illustrative composite. Client details are altered and anonymised.

06Case examples

Two vetoes, one function

ContextDuplicated sibling authority stalling every significant decision.

WorkRole–Right–Responsibility mapping and a published family charter.

ImpactCapital decisions gained a named owner, consultation path and closure point.

A mandate that could not be withdrawn casually

ContextA professional CEO undermined by informal shareholder instruction.

WorkDocumented mandate with defined override conditions and a board process.

ImpactRetention of the leadership team through a full transition year.